Re: sh: Assignments to PATH and XCU 2.9.1

Date:Fri, 19 Mar 2021 17:29:34 + From:"Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group" Message-ID: <84ab3a1c-6445-b73f-8ab2-a92d9fd3d...@gigawatt.nl> | This is technically true, but if there is no conforming shell that | implements 2.9.1 other than by

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001435]: execlp and execvp should not execute a command interpreter when other members of the exec family would fail with ENOEXEC

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1435 == Reported By:zackw Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001435]: execlp and execvp should not execute a command interpreter when other members of the exec family would fail with ENOEXEC

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1435 == Reported By:zackw Assigned To:

Re: sh: Assignments to PATH and XCU 2.9.1

On 19/03/2021 16:41, Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote: In note 5287 to bug 1460 (an innocuous change to the hash command) ( https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1460#c5287 ) Geoff said: [...] that statement about PATH is pointing out a normative requirement from

Minutes of the 18th March 2021 Teleconference

All Enclosed are the minutes of yesterday’s meeting regards Andrew Minutes of the 18th March 2021 Teleconference Austin-1113 Page 1 of 1 Submitted by Andrew Josey, The Open Group. 19th March 2021 Attendees: Don Cragun, IEEE PASC OR Nick Stoughton, USENIX, ISO/IEC

sh: Assignments to PATH and XCU 2.9.1

In note 5287 to bug 1460 (an innocuous change to the hash command) ( https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1460#c5287 ) Geoff said: [...] that statement about PATH is pointing out a normative requirement from XCU 2.9.1. In Issue 8 draft 1.1 it's on page 2292 line 74177: Once a

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001434]: Moving the -p option in the pr utility synopsis

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1434 == Reported By:andras_farkas Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001460]: hash implementations differ when a utility is not found

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1460 == Reported By:geoffclare Assigned To:

[Issue 8 drafts 0001422]: The current definition for the += assingment is in conflict with existing behavior of make and unpredictable/error-prone

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1422 == Reported By:joerg Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001392]: find(1): clarify whether -perm ops - and + should follow chmod

The following issue has been UPDATED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1392 == Reported By:mohd_akram Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001395]: awk radix character in alternative conversion to atof()

The following issue has been UPDATED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1395 == Reported By:geoffclare Assigned To:

Interpretation starting a 30 day review (0001433)

All The following interpretation is starting its 30 day review 0001433: The use of carriage-return in pr https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1433 Comments are due back no later than April 20 2021 regards Andrew Andrew JoseyThe Open Group Austin Group Chair

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001433]: The use of carriage-return in pr

The following issue has been UPDATED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1433 == Reported By:andras_farkas Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001460]: hash implementations differ when a utility is not found

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1460 == Reported By:geoffclare Assigned To:

Re: [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001460]: hash implementations differ when a utility is not found

Date:Thu, 18 Mar 2021 18:52:20 + From:"Austin Group Bug Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group" Message-ID: | A NOTE has been added to this issue. | I also just noticed, that in the Application Usage section of hash, it | says [...] If you saw

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001421]: make APPLICATION USAGE about default rules

The following issue has a resolution that has been APPLIED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1421 == Reported By:geoffclare

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001420]: Clarification: where are internal macros available?

The following issue has a resolution that has been APPLIED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1420 == Reported By:psmith Assigned

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001419]: Missing newline / indentation in .SCCS_GET default rule definition

The following issue has a resolution that has been APPLIED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1419 == Reported By:psmith Assigned

[1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001418]: Add options to ulimit to match get/setrlimit()

The following issue has a resolution that has been APPLIED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1418 == Reported By:geoffclare